The Biggest Swindle
From Mick Piggott
Thursday, 14 June 2012
So 'we're' massively in debt. Well, I'm not, and maybe you aren't either. I don't owe a penny to anyone. But we're told the country is massively in debt. Even more so, we are told, is poor old Greece.
One of the causes of our national debt was having to bail out the banks. Where did the money come from to bail out the banks? Why, from the banks of course.
Public services are being cut to the bone and sold off to private enterprise to pay off 'our' debts. Yet the country has never been wealthier. We can't afford a fully-funded NHS? We could when the country was at its poorest, just after WW2. We can no longer afford proper social services, properly funded aged-person care, decent pensions at 60 or 65? We used to be able to. So where has all the money gone?
For a start, the wealthiest 1,000 people in this country have INCREASED their privately-owned wealth by an amount equal to the national debt since the bank crisis hit four years ago. If we had a government which was prepared to take back that EXTRA wealth, that the very rich have accumulated since the banking crisis allegedly plunged the whole country into debt, that national debt could be paid off - leaving the very rich as wealthy as they were before the crisis! And there would be no need any for cuts in any services whatsoever.
So this whole, manufactured financial crisis does not really exist! It is, in fact, a massive confidence trick perpetrated on the population. All the pain, all the suffering, is for nothing - except to make the rich even richer!
The Tories must understand very well what they are doing, unless they are very stupid. So must their collaborators in the Lib Dems. Unforgivably, the opposition seem happy to go along with the whole rotten fraud. By failing to challenge the confidence trick, the leadership of the Labour party effectively collaborate in the swindle.
Are there any answers? Of course. But our rulers don't want them out there - try getting the following opinions/solutions in the printed or broadcast media (I have). When the banks were in deep trouble, three and four years ago, they should have been allowed to collapse - the government could still have guaranteed savers' deposits, as they did anyway. The collapsed banks should then have been nationalised, without any compensation, and therefore without any cost to the taxpayer. The banks would now have been state-owned and controlled - by a democratically-elected government - and no false 'debts' would have been incurred.
What can a deeply-indebted country like Greece (and Spain, Italy, Ireland - there will inevitably be more) do about their 'debts'? They should default, leave the Eurozone, leave the EU, perhaps re-introduce the drachma. When Argentina, faced with a similar situation, did just that (not re-introduce the drachma!) in 2001/2, and disconnected their currency from the USA dollar, their economy, slowly at first, left their debt-crisis behind, went from strength to strength, and is thriving (comparatively) today. Other countries have done similarly.
What the majority of the population - the 99%, if you like - who are not extremely, incredibly, obscenely rich, need to appreciate, is that all the cuts, and the suffering, are unnecessary, and are based on the lies of the politicians, the bankers, the top bosses (60% remuneration increases, anybody?) - the whole corrupt ruling class, who are lying to us all, out of selfishness and greed. They want to impose hardship on us all just so that they can increase their already vast wealth even further.
What an insane system!
If you'd like to look at this in greater depth, google the Sturdy Blog, 'To Whom Do We Owe This Money, Exactly?' For a detailed account of the mechanisms set up by the banks that so destabilised the world's economies, read 'Whoops! Why everyone owes everyone and no one can pay' by John Lanchester. You can accuse me of being a communist if you like, but neither of these sources are remotely communistic. They do, however, help us cut through the stink of obfuscation that is deliberately heaped on our heads by the politicians.
From Mick Coughlan
Friday, 15 June 2012
At one time I would have ignored the original post as a mere conspiracy theory. I certainly would not have replied to it, but here I am.
I am currently reading a book by Naomi Klein called "Shock Doctrine". The author, using real life instances, ties together the process by which organisations such as the CIA use to prepare people they wish to "interview". They use shock, from early morning raids on their houses to actual electric shock and as we have seen more recently, tactics such as "waterboarding".
She then compares this with the way in which Govt's use shock, such as economic conditions, military coups and even 9/11 to force through ideological elements of thier policies. The book was published just before the financial institution crashes the original poster relates and so we can now see just how our leaders have and are using the crash to get their ideological policies through.
Mrs Thatcher would never have thought it possible to dismantle the NHS, welfare state and our public sector in the way the present Gov't have. Of course it must be mentioned too that this isn't restricted to the current residents of Downing Street as Blair too was attempting to impliment these policies and if the press are to be believed has been advising Cameron. It appears that like Blackpool Rock, if you snap open a politician you get the same message running through them, whatever the colour on the outside - Selfish, greedy and nasty.
So in conclusion, I am now more inclined to give the original post more than a glance and with the benefit of hindsight am now convinced that "they are all in it together" - clover that is, at our expense.
From Mick Piggott
Friday, 15 June 2012
Many thanks to Mick Coughlan for reminding us all of Naomi Klein's brilliant book, 'The Shock Doctrine'. The economic policies now being pursued around the world are exactly those originally promoted by the Milton Friedman School in Chicago, which were so enthusiastically adopted by Reagan and Thatcher - and continued by the New Labour government of Tony Blair. And now, this same so-called economic 'rationalism' is the cornerstone of the policies of the ConDems, and the equally economically far-right government of Angela Merkel.
We need to reject this insanity. And we desperately need a party that will take the lead in the fight back.
From Mick Coughlan
Friday, 15 June 2012
This following link should only be followed if you have a strong stomach.
A current conservative politician, Andrew Rosindell has expressed his admiration for Gen Pinochet. As Mick Piggot points out, Pinochet followed the advise of economist Milton Friedman.
The link is to a New Statesman page detailing some of the acts Pinochet's regime perpetrated on civilians.
This was a deliberate move to create shock to make the populace more accepting of the moves Pinochet wished to make. To my mind anyone who expresses admiration for a person involved in these disgraceful acts should be ostracised from civil society, certainly not in a position of leadership.
From David Telford
Friday, 22 June 2012
Mick - We know we're in debt but to suggest it's just the banks is a little naïve. The banks contributed greatly to the revenues that made the former PM really believe he'd ended the cycle of boom & bust® and he could justify increasing the size of the public sector by 800,000 employees!
Yes the bank-bailout created a lot of debt but you'd not have financed any of the over-spending from Brown without the credit boom and the increased treasury revenues.
Ok, if the wealthiest 1,000 people in this country have increased their privately-owned wealth why should a government have the right to take back that extra wealth? I'm not sure what your job is but perhaps if you had just worked hard to get a promotion, would you not be a teeny bit peeved if the benefits of that promotion was snatched away on a whim 7 furthermore, would you not feel that it was hardly worth putting the effort in the first place or perhaps you'd move somewhere that rewards success?
Relatively speaking, the country is not wealthier. We could afford to pay decent pensions at 60 or 65 in 1945 because the population had the decency to pop their cork within a year or so of retirement. Now, at 60 or 65, people are fit & healthy in mind and body and live for a period equal to their professional lives, irritating but that is never affordable.
I find this amazing that your piece is a stab at the coalition but the problems you describe (if they were true) were a direct result of a Labour government, admittedly the real blame & most of the problems were caused by a small group within Labour including Brown, Balls, Ed Milli, Charlie Whelan etc etc.
I note you feel that when the banks were in deep trouble, three and four years ago, they should have been allowed to collapse - the government could still have guaranteed savers' deposits, as they did anyway. I agree but with that in mind, you then criticise the Nobel winning economist Milton Friedman whom would have agreed with you.
Now, you do make a half decent point. What can a deeply-indebted country like Greece (and Spain, Italy, Ireland - there will inevitably be more) do about their 'debts'? Well, they must trade sufficiently to repay them of course. However, and this is where you are right, they are held back in trade as the Euro hampers their ability to compete. They should leave the Eurozone, not the EU, they should renegotiate the debt and get back to (for Greece) attracting tourists, shipping, agriculture and engineering.